By Ben Kerrigan-
The public administration and constitutional affairs committee has criticised Michael Gove for failing to appear before it to give evidence about the handling of Covid-19 data.
The public administration and constitutional affairs committee said the government’s levels of transparency and openness around the data underpinning key decisions has fallen below expectations, and put a strain on public confidence.
The report called for ministers to learn from the government’s failures in the handling and sharing of data.
The MPs severely criticised Michael Gove for not appearing before them, describing his absence as constituting “contemptuous of parliament”. Gove heads the Cabinet Office, which has shared responsibility for the response to the pandemic with the Department of Health and Social Care.
In their report, the MPs called for accountability for decisions made associated with the pandemic. They also called for the data on which they are based to be clear, to ensure the trust of the public.
The report comes not long after The Eye Of Media.Com criticised Mr Gove for challenging MP Desmond Swayne claim that Covid-19 Deaths numbers were manipulated, while seemingly declining a request by this publication to assure the public that the statistics were not manipulated.
The detailed report stated that ministers sent to represent Mr. Gove, were said to be poorly briefed, and unable to answer the questions put to them, the committee said.
The committee added that when it wrote asking for information, it was often not provided. “This is wilful evasion of parliamentary scrutiny,” said the committee.
The Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the reports of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration and the Health Service Commissioner for England.
The authours of the report said its goals were not to provide a critique of whether the Government made the right or wrong decisions at various points in this pandemic.
Instead, they said its objective was to examine whether those decisions were transparent, and whether the data underpinning them was available for Parliament and the public to hold the Government to account.
Evasion Of Parliamentary Scrutiny
This is wilful evasion of parliamentary scrutiny,” the report said. The committee reminded the government of its “obligation to hold itself open to scrutiny and expects each recommendation to be responded to in full.”
The committee said it “expects Gove to respond to this report, clearly outlining his understanding of his own responsibilities, and the ways in which he should be held to account by Parliament.”
Committee chair William Wragg said, “Delays in sharing vital data, and a reluctance to share detailed data, almost certainly hampered the local response. This over-centralisation must not be repeated . . . If the government learns the right lessons and improves how it shares data with partners and the public, we can be in the best possible position to react to any future stages of the pandemic.
The report said that where Ministers quote statistics, the underlying data must be published, and hyperlinks must be provided from Ministerial statements to the data, so that is easy for journalists and members of the public to find.
Verification Of Statistics
The report also said that ministers have not always published the data underpinning the statistics quoted, which means these cannot be readily verified. This is not adequately transparent and is not. consistent with the UK Statistics Authority Code of Practice.
It added that The Ministerial Code must be strengthened to require Ministers to abide by the UKSA Code. Ministers have passed responsibility between the Cabinet Office and Department of Health and Social Care. It said that the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster’s refusal to appear before this Committee as part of this inquiry is contemptuous of Parliament.
Ethnicity Not Recorded In Data
The current, the death registration and certification process does not record ethnicity, which means there is not a good flow of data on Covid -19 related mortality by ethnicity.
The Committee has been told by numerous contributors to the inquiry that there is insufficient evidence to understand the disproportionate impact of Covid -19 on people from Black, Asian and Minority.
The report credits the British government for an increasing amount of openness with the data, such as the development of the coronavirus dashboard and the publication of the advice the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage), although they would like it to be “more consistent and timely”.
On average, the Sage minutes are published 49 days after meetings, but sometimes with a much longer gap.
The committee highlighted a concern from numerous contributors to its inquiry that there was insufficient data on the impact of coronavirus on people from black, Asian and minority ethnic groups. The report says there is “more work to do”.
The MPs say the data presented at the Downing Street briefings for the press and public were inaccurate, and sometimes based on worst-case scenarios.
Winton professor Spiege lhalter, Winton professor of the public understanding of risk at Cambridge University, told the committee in evidence that the numbers could be based on extreme assumptions.
He said communication around the 31 October briefing on the second lockdown, for instance, “was particularly poor” and the projection data of “up to 4,000 deaths a day” was subsequently widely ridiculed.
On the subject of worst-case scenarios, he said in written evidence: “I don’t want to ascribe motivations to anyone, but if someone were trying to manipulate emotions and wanting to frighten rather than inform, then this is the kind of thing they might do.”
The committee shared his concern, saying in the report “that large projections of infections or deaths are being used in an attempt to stoke anxiety rather than to inform the public”.
Other witnesses said they believed there had been “politicisation” of some of the data – for instance around the ambition voiced by the health secretary, Matt Hancock, to reach 100,000 tests a day by the end of April.
The question of politicisation of data raises questions of integrity, but there is no evidence to support such. The British government has been generally supportive of businesses and organisations during the pandemic, but there are growing questions about the handling and transparency of data associated with the pandemic.
The entire report will be the subject of further study and analysis as to when the level of transparency requested will be supplied.